http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2007/11/28/what-trans-means-to-me/#more-6290

There is an east coast store as well….

I would assume that our dualistic western way of thinking can’t do much better
I may be naive but, to me, that reflects the impact of male thinking from the beginning of times. You take this and mix it with some early male-conducted religious doctrines, and you end up with everything else that does not fit them labeled as such (I am sure there might be a few of these names that were coined by women though).

In a “death and dying” class I took back in college, we were introduced to an interesting timeline of the impact of men [males] on life and religion, and how they somewhat managed to take over the whole thing and also control things outside of religion. If you take the narrow minded and macho way of thinking from men, and contain that in a manipulative and controlling religious way of seeing life, you can understand their sad attempt at not being associated or mistaken for what they ought not to be.
Yes, I am a male, and I understand that I may be offending others. But looking at the history of this country, or societies in general, one can see the obvious effort of men to distance themselves from women. It could be defended perhaps by the fact that we are a species, among others, where being a male is supposed to mean that one has to be in control, in charge, at the “top” of the hierarchy. Bbut heck… Can’t we do better than this?

A sad way to look at life. I am blessed to have been raised by women, and if the whole “male institution” could learn a few things from the women who have been mothers, and those who have not, they would perhaps understand the necessity or importance of tolerance and respect, and at the same time they could stop worrying about whether a man, or a woman, or a transwoman, is fit for the job based on just that, and instead work with everyone and get the best out for this.

Red, in regards to naming the ejaculation in relation to a body part vs. “female this” or “male that”, while I totally agree with your way of putting it–it’s a nice literary way of describing things, I think it will still be gender specific, perhaps more implicit, more subtle, but in the end a g-spot is found in a vagina that is found in a woman, the prostate is found in men, etc.
Again, while I agree with the point you are making, I see very little effect to it besides being more subtle. Would love to be enlightened more on your view, as I have a feeling that I may have missed the point. Sowwwy. =)

Labels by nature create an expectation of some sort. If I go to the store and buy a can of Chicken Noodle soup, there is an expectation that when I open the can, golden noodley goodness will issue forth. And, I will be somewhat disappointed if not slightly miffed should that can issue forth tomatoey goodness.

I don’t think a binary gender identification system is the way to go. I don’t think a binary system of any sort is the way to go. As Tom Robbins said, “There are two kinds of people in this world: people who think there are two kinds of people in this world, and the rest of us that know better.” A bit paradoxical when you think about it. As such, I pose the question: does more than two labels resolve the paradoxes associated with a binary system, or does it increase the number of paradoxes?

The answer, for me, to my own question, is that it is largely an irrelevant one. Labels aren’t what give people meaning, people are what give lables meaning. That being so, it seems to me that the labels are unnecessary to embracing the person behind them.

I fully agree that no label can contain the full story of any human being. But that doesn’t mean that we need to limit ourselves to two categories. That’s where we end up forcing ourselves into boxes. Using words that reflect the range of the human experience is much more liberating.

What would YOU call Trans Man Ejaculation? Is it the same?